1. Results from Fluka Studies Updates since Imperial Meeting  Problems encountered  Solutions  Results  Misc. Next Steps

2. Simulation Progress in UK Updates since Amsterdam:  Geant3/4 Comparisons  Luminosity Spectrum  Mokka  Fluka  Misc. Next Steps Work of: David Ward, Chris Ainsley, George Mavromanolakis, Stewart Boogert, NKW

3. Manchester, 2/10/2003Nigel Watson / CCLRC-RAL & Birmingham3 G3/G4 Studies, TDR geometry  Gheisha problems affecting baryons  5 bugs had been independently reported by Cassel and Bower (SLAC) to CERN  Affected mesons also, but less significant  Fixes for some (not all!) implemented in G4  Preliminary studies with antiprotons indicate discrepencies in HCAL between Geant versions, agreement at ~10% level

4. Manchester, 2/10/2003Nigel Watson / CCLRC-RAL & Birmingham4 G3/G4 Studies, Prototype  For TDR geometry, mokka writes G4  G3 code “out of the box”  Extend this to prototype models  OK for HCAL (same geometry driver in TDR and prototype)  Different driver (proto01) for ECAL  Attempt to implement, replaced use of G4VPlacement by (mokka analogue) MyPlacement  Difficulties with CellMap routine  Prototype does not have standard module-stave structure  Wrote replacement for CellMap “by hand”  Not entirely general, but seems to work

5. Manchester, 2/10/2003Nigel Watson / CCLRC-RAL & Birmingham5 First Prototype Results in G3  mokka prototype  G3 and embedded in Brahms  ECAL and HCAL  Geometry looks OK  e.g. 5 GeV  , normal incidence

6. Manchester, 2/10/2003Nigel Watson / CCLRC-RAL & Birmingham6 First Prototype Results in G3  Zoom on ECAL  Looks reasonable, move on to more quantitative studies  Compare G3/G4 using 5 GeV e ,  ,  

7. Manchester, 2/10/2003Nigel Watson / CCLRC-RAL & Birmingham7 5 GeV  , e    5 GeV   E HCAL /E total e  5 GeV e  E HCAL /E total ECALHCAL transverse longitudinal

8. Manchester, 2/10/2003Nigel Watson / CCLRC-RAL & Birmingham8 5 GeV    Distributions as expected  Encouraging so far   5 GeV   E HCAL /E total ECALHCAL transverse longitudinal

9. Manchester, 2/10/2003Nigel Watson / CCLRC-RAL & Birmingham9 Hadron Endcap  mokka G3 interface not implemented in endcap  Uses (general) G4Polyhedra volumes, no code to write out equivalent G3 geometry  Code added to MyPlacement.cc, adapted from G3 PGON volume  Appears to be working

10. Manchester, 2/10/2003Nigel Watson / CCLRC-RAL & Birmingham10 HCAL Endcap Geometry Demo Whole detector Focus on endcap region

11. Manchester, 2/10/2003Nigel Watson / CCLRC-RAL & Birmingham11 Luminosity Spectrum  Progress: large discrepancy in dL/d  s of March CALICE meeting now understood: FSR had not been included in calculation of true  s  Required to unfold cross- section data e.g. for precise m t measurement  Use wide angle Bhabha  100-450mrad) in main calorimeters, tracker  Deduce  s’ from acolinearity  Need, for ~ beam energy particles,  good    especially in endcaps  use GUINEA-PIG (beam dynamics)+BHWIDE  linked to LC-ABD work

12. Manchester, 2/10/2003Nigel Watson / CCLRC-RAL & Birmingham12 Resolution Studies  Based on samples of 5k single e   model TDR/D09M1  , two regions  10 0 – 170 0 (whole detector)  6 0 -35 0 (endcap only)  energies: 5, 7.5, 10, 15, 20, 50, 100 GeV  flat angular distribution from origin

13. Manchester, 2/10/2003Nigel Watson / CCLRC-RAL & Birmingham13 Energy Resolution  LC-DET/2001-058    bias and resolution worse at higher energy  leakage?  Calorimeter resolution  stochastic ~ 14%  constant ~ 4%  cf. TDR (11%, 1%) energy / GeV single electron energy resolution,    single electron energy resolution,    ● whole detector ● endcap only mean bias in reconstructed energy bias resolution

14. Manchester, 2/10/2003Nigel Watson / CCLRC-RAL & Birmingham14 Angular Resolution  Use energy weighted angles  Excellent polar angle resolution (<10 -3 ) assuming originates from IP  Achieved well below 175GeV (beam energy for m t measurement) single electron angular resolution,   single electron angular resolution,   energy / GeV mean bias in reconstructed angle ● whole detector ● endcap only

15. Manchester, 2/10/2003Nigel Watson / CCLRC-RAL & Birmingham15 AimAim  Systematic comparison between Mokka and Fluka implementation of test beam configuration  Particularly interesting for hadronic interactions  See DRW’s Geant studies  Want flexibility to  Adapt to new mokka detector models  Investigate full TDR type geometry  Original problems  Fluka geometry defined by data cards  Only limited geometrical structures supported  Repeated structures at 1 level only

16. Manchester, 2/10/2003Nigel Watson / CCLRC-RAL & Birmingham16 MethodMethod [From ATL-SOFT-98-039]  Geomety and physics decoupled in G4 and Fluka  Wrappers for f77/C++  Fluka authors’ tests  Simple detectors  Identical results Fluka,Fluka+G4  T36 calorimeter: 81 layers Pb (10mm)-scint.(2.5mm)  Consistent results  My first test  Use T36 calorimeter as above

17. Manchester, 2/10/2003Nigel Watson / CCLRC-RAL & Birmingham17 (Missing!) replicated volumes…  User routine callable when boundary between volumes detected during tracking a particle  G4 replica or parametrised volumes Fluka “lattice volumes”  Not seen during tracking  Repeated placement of identical G4 physical volumes are seen  Solution (from Flugg author)  Use rudimentary drawing routine, gives user control at each step in tracking  Ambiguity in region index (3x tower stacks, and 5 detector slabs corresponding to same thickness of W plate) no longer problematic Fluka Issues

18. Manchester, 2/10/2003Nigel Watson / CCLRC-RAL & Birmingham18 Volume Ambiguity  fluka ‘sees’ 3x32 Si volumes  id for wafers degenerate  in z (x3 towers)  in y within a stack of 5 detector slabs (10 Si layers)

19. Manchester, 2/10/2003Nigel Watson / CCLRC-RAL & Birmingham19 Current Status  Mokka running within flugg/Fluka framework  Using Mokka-01-05 + Geant4.5.0.p01 + clhep1.8.0 + gcc3.2  Flugg05 (Jan. 2003)  Fluka 2002.4 (end May 2003)  Procedure: start from Mokka release and remove:  all classes except for detector construction, detector parametrisation, magnetic field construction  corresponding #include, variable, class definitions in.cc/.hh  anything related to G4RunManager, DetectorMessenger  code where SensitiveDetector is set  interactive code, visualisation, etc.  Some (…) difficulties  to ensure completely consistent libraries  minimal debugging tools in Fluka if (when) things go wrong  No idea what was wrong with P55 model (no errors from G4 geometry debugging tools, yet fluka consistently crashes).  Now using ProtEcalHcalRPC model, works

20. Manchester, 2/10/2003Nigel Watson / CCLRC-RAL & Birmingham20 Fluka with G3/G4 ECALHCAL transverse longitudinal e  5 GeV e  E HCAL /E total In these plots, fluka has energy deposited in all material, not just active layers

21. Manchester, 2/10/2003Nigel Watson / CCLRC-RAL & Birmingham21 Fluka with G3/G4 ECALHCAL transverse longitudinal   5 GeV   E HCAL /E total ECALHCAL transverse longitudinal In these plots, fluka has energy deposited in all material, not just active layers

22. Manchester, 2/10/2003Nigel Watson / CCLRC-RAL & Birmingham22 Fluka with G3/G4 ECALHCAL transverse longitudinal   5 GeV   E HCAL /E total In these plots, fluka has energy deposited in all material, not just active layers

23. Manchester, 2/10/2003Nigel Watson / CCLRC-RAL & Birmingham23 Ongoing Work  Restrict study to energy deposited in active layers (trivial and will make faster)  All material (ECAL+HCAL), 2k   takes ~ 5 hr  Silicon layers only, 2k   takes ~ 20 min.  Increased speed, find abort in G4Navigator:ComputeStep ~ 5k events (precision of location)  Digest very recent distributions   Fix errors ( at least appear in G4 not fluka -may arise from fluka settings)  Review energy thresholds (also possible to define step size) in Fluka  default min. K.E.  100 keV  neutrons, 19.6 MeV  energy e/  500 keV (??)  low energy neutron cross-section  PEMF, etc.,  Compare systematically with G3/G4 results, e.g.  primary incident at same position  thresholds, mip normalisation, etc.  Should extract information using CGA to Mokka format ~contained within detector slab?

24. Manchester, 2/10/2003Nigel Watson / CCLRC-RAL & Birmingham24 Misc.Misc.  calice2root  converts ASCII.kin,.step,.hits files, merged and compressed, into root format  easily converted into LCIO, fortran binary, etc.  simple objects/struct for individual hits, tracking steps, truth hits  works with both full and prototype detector  CGA experience, input to clustering algorithm  use to extract necessary info. for reconstruction  difficulty with prototype, stops tracking in RPC HCAL

25. Manchester, 2/10/2003Nigel Watson / CCLRC-RAL & Birmingham25 OrganisationOrganisation  People working at different sites, try to reduce technical effort by creating common “reference” repository for shared s/w  /afs/rl.ac.uk/calice (world readable)  flugg  flukka  io (data storage and object persistancy)  java (just for lcio)  mokka  recon (calorimeter reconstruction)  run-scripts (pbs and local run scripts)  tools (3D viewers etc)  G4, CLHEP from cern afs  Allows mokka to be run on RAL CSF, or remotely (compiler permitting)  Details under “UK simulation” from http://www.hep.ph.ic.ac.uk/~calice/ http://www.hep.ph.ic.ac.uk/~calice/  Several of us also now involved in LC accelerator studies (beam delivery system, machine detector interface)

26. Manchester, 2/10/2003Nigel Watson / CCLRC-RAL & Birmingham26 Local MySQL db  From Gabriel Musat last week  mysqldump –A –h aldeberan.in2p3.fr –u consult –p >mylocal.out  edit mylocal.out (emacs), remove few mysql definitions  find local machine with mysql demon running  issue mysql –u local_use –p <any.mysql  where any.mysql defines where edited mokka db is  local server will then retain copy of your mokka db  modify Control.cc to redefine server, or try cmd line options to mokka  Tried 1 st two steps. I will put prescription & examples of before/after edits on web or calice UK afs

27. Manchester, 2/10/2003Nigel Watson / CCLRC-RAL & Birmingham27 Summary & Future Plans  Good progress in all areas  Cambridge starting to look at energy flow algorithms and impact of MC modelling on them  Study clustering, lumi. spectrum  Continue G3/G4 studies with prototype geometry, and also HCAL endcap in full detector – George M. starting to take over here, validate changes, update to latest versions of code.  Continue fluka work now we have first real results using mokka prototype  Consider test beam programme/strategy